GDT: HFBoards GDT | 11-1-19 - Thanks alot 9 you ruined everything.

[super6646]

Just curious, is that 1st rounder lotto protected? Because according to cap friendly it isn't.

 

[serp]

Man the Sharks make some hideous defensive mistakes that lead to goals . That just can't happen . Nobody picked up Ehlers at all.

 

[Saitama]

Nothing like completely robbing the Sharks of 2 points to make me a happy man!

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Goalie interference was the right call in the Jets-Sharks game by the way. I didn’t agree with it at first, but two angles shown by TSN pretty blatantly revealed that the Sharks player prevented Hellebuyck from being fully able to get across and make a play on the puck.

I’m sick of home fans using the “but the refs called this other one like this so therefore this one should go in my favor...” argument. By the rule, it’s the correct call. Period. How you felt about other calls and this and that isn’t relevant to referees properly calling something by the book. And stop the insanity with how two separate plays are automatically “identical” and therefore you can just apply a certain ruling in your favor.

It’s goalie interference. Because it’s in the rules. The referees got it right. For f***’s sale, let the refs get the call right and not try to twist shit so you can justify why they should get this one wrong because you think they got that one wrong before, blah, blah, blah...

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

And yet that is not the norm for what has been called for the longest time. You're the one ignoring a large majority of the history on the matter because you just can't be honest.

You can sit around all day long and pull out “identical” situations which would point the call in your favor.

Every time something is properly called by the letter of the law, home fans bring out some example as to inconsistency. So what are you arguing? That referees should just f*** up every call because they’ve f***ed ones up before?

Evaluate it as it is. Each situation on its own. By the goalie interference rule, that was goalie interference. Period.

And I really don’t care to here “hey, I’m just looking for ‘consistency, not for an unfair advantage”. Consistency is important. But the reality is that there is some level of subjectivity with refereeing across all sports. Best you can hope for is that each situation is evaluated to the best of everyone’s ability and the rule book is followed.

I find the whole “I just want consistency” line is more a product of biased fans justifying close calls going their way than anything else.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

You can sit around all day long and pull out “identical” situations which would point the call in your favor.

Every time something is properly called by the letter of the law, home fans bring out some example as to inconsistency. So what are you arguing? That referees should just **** up every call because they’ve ****ed ones up before?

Evaluate it as it is. Each situation on its own. By the goalie interference rule, that was goalie interference. Period.

And I really don’t care to here “hey, I’m just looking for ‘consistency, not for an unfair advantage”. Consistency is important. But the reality is that there is some level of subjectivity with refereeing across all sports. Best you can hope for is that each situation is evaluated to the best of everyone’s ability and the rule book is followed.

I find the whole “I just want consistency” line is more a product of biased fans justifying close calls going their way than anything else.

I find it difficult to prove that what Labanc did in any way prevented Hellebucyk from doing his job but I don't see there being consistency in that call and so I have the opinion I have. If that's going to be the way it's going to be called that's fine but there's no way in hell they're actually going to consistently call it like that.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I find it difficult to prove that what Labanc did in any way prevented Hellebucyk from doing his job but I don't see there being consistency in that call and so I have the opinion I have. If that's going to be the way it's going to be called that's fine but there's no way in hell they're actually going to consistently call it like that.

Did the Sharks broadcast (I assume that is what you were watching) show the overhead and the angle from the side Kane shot at? Especially the latter view was very revealing. Labanc initially went to swipe for the puck but then continued on and pushed his pad into the net. For a split second, his stick was lodged underneath the pad of Hellebuyck.

Refs have gotten it wrong before, but this one was right. Would Kane have scored anyways? Perhaps, but not the question at hand.

And yes, while there are very similar occurrences in hockey games, situations are never identical. As long as you go on believing you can draw on an “identical” situation to support your arguments, you’re going to retain a bias on all of these calls.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Did the Sharks broadcast (I assume that is what you were watching) show the overhead and the angle from the side Kane shot at? Especially the latter view was very revealing. Labanc initially went to swipe for the puck but then continued on and pushed his pad into the net. For a split second, his stick was lodged underneath the pad of Hellebuyck.

Refs have gotten it wrong before, but this one was right. Would Kane have scored anyways? Perhaps, but not the question at hand.

And yes, while there are very similar occurrences in hockey games, situations are never identical. As long as you go on believing you can draw on an “identical” situation to support your arguments, you’re going to retain a bias on all of these calls.

You're never going to not have a bias on subjective calls. That's not a real point to make. I'm not even mad that it went this way but I'm not going to put up with statements that are blatant falsehoods pretending like that sort of sequence hasn't been let go and the goal count. That's really all that was.

 

[Skolman]

Oilers are 9-4-1
Sharks are 4-9-1

Who would have thought?

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

You're never going to not have a bias on subjective calls. That's not a real point to make. I'm not even mad that it went this way but I'm not going to put up with statements that are blatant falsehoods pretending like that sort of sequence hasn't been let go and the goal count. That's really all that was.

I acknowledged there is subjectivity and that calls have been wrong before. Generally, we all are primary fans of one team and we have all experienced it.

The problem is that in seeing this you are focused more on “what is a ruling on a SIMILAR play that allowed this goal to stand” rather than thinking about it directly in context of the rule book. That being said, based on your first post, you’re not even acknowledging that the call was right by the rule book.

Your biased angle on this couldn’t be more obvious. The call was correct. Let’s hope for continued correct calls other plays and similar plays in the future. With the obvious acknowledgement that it will never be 100%

 

[Artorius Horus T]

Why does Getzlaf already have 7 goals this season???? The heck has happened to the NHL???? -in this season-
- Ryan has 54 goals scored in his last 273 regular season games, before this season, now paced for almost 40 goals.

I have noticed this season how there are more "strange" names at the top 20 of the goal scoring board than ever,
also, plenty of great goal scorers who have struggled in this early season.

ITS EARLY OF THE SEASON, I KNOW

Neal 11 goals (3rd) - 65 pace
Schenn 10 goals (6th) - 58 pace
Hintz 9 goals (7th) - 52 pace
Lindholm 9 goals (8th) - 50 pace
Henrique 8 goals (10th) - 47 pace
Oshie 8 goals (11th) - 43 pace
Haula 7 goals (14th) - 43 pace
EKane 7 goals (15th) - 54 pace (77 games)
Lindblom 7 goals (16th) - 48 pace
Bonino 7 goals (18th) - 43 pace

few others:

Drouin 7 goals - 43 pace
Perron 7 goals - 41 pace
Carlson 7 goals - 38 pace
Garland 6 goals - 41 pace
Armia 6 goals - 45 pace
Vatanen 4 goals - 30 pace

(the are many many others as well)

the struggled: (the worst 6)

Kessel 2 goals - 13 pace
Seguin 3 goals - 16 pace
Atkinson 3 goals - 17 pace
Kane 3 goals - 22 pace
DeBrincat 3 goals - 22 pace
Kucherov 4 goals - 25 pace

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I acknowledged there is subjectivity and that calls have been wrong before. Generally, we all are primary fans of one team and we have all experienced it.

The problem is that in seeing this you are focused more on “what is a ruling on a SIMILAR play that allowed this goal to stand” rather than thinking about it directly in context of the rule book. That being said, based on your first post, you’re not even acknowledging that the call was right by the rule book.

Your biased angle on this couldn’t be more obvious. The call was correct. Let’s hope for continued correct calls other plays and similar plays in the future. With the obvious acknowledgement that it will never be 100%

Except that the standard you're talking about is not the standard that is actually applied. What is in the rule book does not necessarily mean what is actually applied as a standard for enforcement in this league. There is no rule that states that blood on a high stick is an automatic double minor but that is the standard that the officials have set with the league. These sorts of calls are not different in how they are called. It would be one thing if it was in the rule book and it was a standard call made for the situation. It is not. It can be if they so choose and I wouldn't have a problem with that if that were the case but it simply isn't. Anybody arguing otherwise on that is rewriting history to suit their biases. You're more worried about biases and discrediting rather than speaking about the argument and the truth of the matter. You're not going to get very far making a bias argument when everyone has it even if you're a third party to the teams involved. There is no unbiased take for something like this so you're making no real point here.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Except that the standard you're talking about is not the standard that is actually applied. What is in the rule book does not necessarily mean what is actually applied as a standard for enforcement in this league. There is no rule that states that blood on a high stick is an automatic double minor but that is the standard that the officials have set with the league. These sorts of calls are not different in how they are called. It would be one thing if it was in the rule book and it was a standard call made for the situation. It is not. It can be if they so choose and I wouldn't have a problem with that if that were the case but it simply isn't. Anybody arguing otherwise on that is rewriting history to suit their biases. You're more worried about biases and discrediting rather than speaking about the argument and the truth of the matter. You're not going to get very far making a bias argument when everyone has it even if you're a third party to the teams involved. There is no unbiased take for something like this so you're making no real point here.

So if everyone and everything is biased, what’s the point of even arguing about it? Can’t do anything about it. Everyone is biased right?

I now point you to the rulebook. You are minimizing the importance of the rulebook (at least in this situation) because it doesn’t give you a favorable outcome to how you think that play for your team should have been called.

You are arguing that everything is biased and then simultaneously minimizing my response that this is exactly why you lean on the rulebook for each individual call first and foremost.

With your own acknowledgments of inevitable subjectivity, you’re just locking yourself into a debate that is based entirely on opinion. It’s shocking how you expect it to get anywhere past endlessly bitching no matter what is called. You’re just muddying the waters to go down this road of bitching about the refereeing no matter what is actually called.

The high stick example is somewhat of a a straw man. Between delay of gamer and high stick, they art pretty much the only calls that will always be called the same. The rule states “injury” but how can you actually determine injury? Blood is a decent way to say there’s an injury, but what else? There’s no other way to really decipher 2 minutes or 4 minutes. You can form easy consistency there so referees have to appease fans and players alike.

Bringing that back around to goaltender interference plays which require exponentially more scrutiny and examination is a stretch to say the least.

 

[Magnus the Duck]

Why does Getzlaf already have 7 goals this season???? The heck has happened to the NHL???? -in this season-
- Ryan has 54 goals scored in his last 273 regular season games, before this season, now paced for almost 40 goals.

New coach told Getzlaf to shoot more. Last season we where last in GF and it's not like we have added some elite scorers since then. We do have several good scorers though and have to use them, like Getzlaf and Silfverberg etc.